pakistan03

http://www.pakistanchristianvoice.net/OctNov2000.cfm

Internet Magazine
October & November 2000

In This Month Issue

Editorial

Pakistan is going to have Local Bodies election soon in some part of the country. Election is the time when people can use their freedom to chose for their leaders. In the Local Bodies election, minorities have a very little or not role at all. There is no representation of the minorities and their freedom is being violated. This scenario of the election and the minorities has a long history in Pakistan.

It is fact that Pakistan came into existence through the role and votes of the minorities at that time. In the past couple of decades, the rulers of Pakistan for their personal benefits and under the pressure of extremist groups introduced discriminatory laws such as Blasphemy Law and Separate Electorate etc. These laws have created disharmony and unrest among the people living together for centuries. The laws are like sword on the minorities all the time.

In this issue of pakistanchristianvoice.net we are presenting to you the issue of Separate Electorate. General Zia-ul-Haq, the president of Pakistan at that time introduced this particular segment into the laws to put down some of the political parties and make the minorities second class citizens. In other words to drag the minorities from the main stream of the country. There were some governments wanted to take away this particular clause from the law but under the pressure of extremist were not able to do so.

We the minorities in Pakistan want to be in the main stream of the country not a second class citizen. There are some members of the minorities who are in favor of separate electorate for the personal benefits. But look at the assemblies and their role, participation in making the new laws and decision making: no one listen to them, they are bought and sold in the political market and have no stand of their own; they are like 'yes sir' puppets.

We are for the joint electorate to restore the relationship among the people, create harmony, to remain in the main stream of the country, to take away the dividing factors of tensions, leaders who care for all not only their particular group, and work for the human dignity rather than destroying it.

The pakistanchristianvoice.net urge and encourage all of the readers to have a better understanding of the situation in the country especially the issue of elections, help and support us in this struggle for the restoration of the JOINT ELECTORATE.

Chief Editor

Political Order Apartheid in Pakistan in The Name of Religion by Fr Bonnie Mendes

The Case for Joint Electorate by Peter Jacob

System of Religious Apartheid (Separate Electorates) by Aftab Mughal

Joint OR Separate Electorate by Muhammad Waseem

Joint Electorates for National Integrity by Fr. Aftab James Paul

Towards Joint Electorate in Pakistan by Ms. Jennifer Jag Jivan

Political Order Apartheid in Pakistan in The Name of Religion

Fr Bonnie Mendes

The Father of the nation, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, on August 11, 1947, said,

‘You are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed – that has nothing to do with the business of the state….. We are all citizens and equal citizens of one state.’

As a Pakistani, the enlightened words of Quaid always guide me to envision the status of the nation in the present world scenario. Unfortunately the Quaid died when the country was in its infancy. As soon as Quaid-e-Azam died, the politicians started fighting for power and control over the affairs of the state. The leaders started calling one another 'Ghurdaar' and fought for the power. They never followed the ideas of Quaid-e-Azam. The obvious result is that today we have total confusion about the ideology of the state and have lost sight of the great vision that the Quaid had given to the nation.

In pre-partition India, there was a crucial time, in the 1940s when India would remain united or there would be partition. The Christians voted for partition, and Pakistan came into being. Despite that fact, the worst victims of every government after Quaid-e-Azam have been the religious minorities. Soon after partition, after the death of the father of the nation, Liaquat Ali Khan introduced the Objectives Resolution, The religious minorities were given guarantees that it was only a preamble, however, it later became a crucial part of the Constitution.

Every ruler, Ayub Khan, Zulifiqar Ali Bhutto, General Zia-ul-Haq, Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif and Pervez Musharraf have let down the religious minorities. Some of them introduced changes in the constututions which have cut off the religious minorities from the national mainstream.

Every government has been unfair to the religious minorities. Let me cite a few examples: Ayub Khan introduced compulsory Islamic education for all the Muslim students. However, he forgot about the millions of other religious minorities. They were not allowed to teach their religions to their students. Soon after partition, after the death of the Father of the nation, Liaquat Ali Khan introduced the Objectives Resolution, The religious minorities were given guarantees that it was only a preamble, however, it later became a crucial part of the Constitution.

Zulifiqar Ali Bhutto nationalized Christian educational institutions. That broke the backbone not only of the Christian community but also also the backbone of education in Pakistan. It lowered the standard of education in the country. Till today we are clamouring for our educational institutions. Nearly thirty years later we have still to get back our colleges and many of our schools.

Worse was to come under the military dictator, General Zia-ul-Haq. He made changes in the constitution of Pakistan and introduced the Separate Electorate System in the country. With this the whole country was divided into five religious compartments.

The worst thing ever done was the induction of Separate Electorate System in 1985. The system helped to prolong the regime of General Zia but it disintegrated the whole society. The country is divided into five compartments i-e Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Ahmedyas, and others (Parsi and other smaller religious groups). The Separate Electorate System has resulted in the segregation of the Christians and all other religious minorities from the political main stream. In the separate electorate system a Muslim can vote only for a Muslim and a Christian only for a Christian. This is a religious apartheid.

Christians and other minorities were cut off from the Muslim counterparts in the elections. This is nothing else but political order apartheid in the name of religion. We who fought apartheid in South Africa, have today become victims of apartheid.

The Separate Electorate System has got legal cover under the Eight Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan. Till then every constitution of Pakistan had joint electorates. In fact, it is the only system in Islam, as the pact of Medina at the time of the prophet had the joint electorate system and tolerance of all no matter to what religion they belonged.

Zia ul Haq also brought the Shariat Bill. The alienation felt by the minorities in their own homeland, is threatened by and promulgation of Islamic laws and the way Islamic law is interpreted and put into practice push the religious minorities’ against the wall. The establishment Federal Shariat Court, in addition to the civil courts, is another problem for the religious minorities, because they cannot judges in those courts and worse still, their lawyers cannot practice in the Federal Shariat Court.

The understanding of the common Pakistani Muslim has been developed in away he feels as if the country was formed by and for the Muslims alone, which is historically incorrect and unfair. This situation has made the lives of the minorities' insecure at the community level. The common Muslim sees them as second class citizens. There is no sense of interdependency in the routine life has evolved, as differences have been developed between bot the communities.

Both the governments of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif did little to rectify these errors. The religious minorities did not get any benefits from them. There was legislation that the religious minorities could remember them with pride. Nawaz Sharif did his best to steam roll his views on the nation and become the Amir ul Momineen, through his Fifteenth Amendment. Again, we joined others in protesting this bill. It failed when Pervez Musharraf took over the reins of the country, and Nawaz Shairf was jailed.

The long awaited Devolution of Power and Responsibility plan given by Pervez Musharaf has strengthened the religious apartheid in the country. The research done by SAMAT will help the government authorities understand the implication of the Plan at the Union Council level and the persecution and human rights violation resulted with this plan.

We have moved far away from the original vision given by Quaid-e-Azam in his first speech to the Constituent Assembly. The obvious result is that the religious minorities are shouting for justice, both within the country and abroad. They demand equal rights, as equal citizens of this country, but this government keeping in track with the military government of Zia ul Haq is forcing the religious minorities into a tight corner.

The time has come to get up and demand full rights in the country. First of all we want Joint Electorates,

Dr David Elisha Secretary general of the Minority Advisory Committee of the Punjab, (MACP) -whilst resigning his post in protest - writes, "From the very outset, the MACP had, in complete solidarity with the overwhelming sentiment nationwide, demanded an end to electoral inequality and discrimination by burying the "mother" of all discriminatory laws that specifically target them, namely, separate electorates and, thereby, bringing an end to government-sponsored and supported religious apartheid in Pakistan !

"Yet, for reasons unfathomable, the present government has chosen to continue the universally discredited policy of a religion-based electoral college in the forthcoming Local Body elections. This is a resounding slap in the face of not only all non-Muslim Pakistanis but of all progressive forces in Pakistan which seek to inculcate a culture of equality, freedom and recognition of basic human rights for all across the body politic of our nation. Apparently, such aims are not a priority on the national agenda. Through its decision, the government has totally and, I dare say, deliberately, chosen to go against the wishes, demands, hopes and aspirations of its non-Muslim citizenry who have been yearning, for the last fifteen (15) years, to be freed from the enslavement of electoral segregation and be allowed their due role, recognition and representation as full-fledged citizens of Pakistan. Under these circumstances, the MACP becomes a meaningless entity.

"This heavy-handedness leaves me no choice but to dissociate myself in protest from all oppressive forces that seek to shackle non-Muslim Pakistanis in continued servility and inferiority on account of their faith. I pray that the Almighty will sweep His arc of enlightenment across the benighted rulership of our nation who may, hopefully, in His light and nature, recognize the common humanity all of us share, not as fragments of socio-ideological solitudes, but as one nation, strong and free ! And, while I wait for this miracle to take place, I shall continue to strive for that sense of dignity and equality which the government has chosen to deny me - and others like me - all to its monumental shame!"

What David Elisha has written is an expression of the gut feeling of every member of all religious minorities today in Pakistan. They are the most disappointed lot. They have contributed to the progress and prosperity of the nation, they have fought wars, shoulder to shoulder with their Muslim counterparts. Today their rights have been denied them. They will struggle no matter what the cost. They are struggling to carry the cross and move forward. The legal package given them has become a burden very heavy to carry. They are praying for strength to carry the cross. They pray, "Make the yoke be easy and the burden light". (Mt 11: 30)

Your magazine is coming out in time for the world to react strongly against the injustice. Out of 21 seats we have only one seat in the Union Council elections. We cannot stand and vote for the general seats, we cannot contest or vote for the women seats, not even for the labour and peasant seats. We are left out in cold, absolutely toothless. The Nazim and Naib Nazim can only be Muslims, as we cannot vote for those important seats, and they are the ones who hold power at the Tehsil and District levels.

Time has come to rally and protest not only in the country, but wherever, the Christians have some political awareness.

A few Christians without understanding the whole Devolution of Power Plan 2000 of the government are still advocating Separate Electorates. They are either ignorant of politics or are paid by the government to promote their cause.

Readers should protest and protest in every nook and corner of the country against this absurd system which will only divide the country further. That is the writing on the wall. We are fighting to save Pakistan. Join us. We are Pakistanis and want to get rid of this minority stain. We are full citizens and will only rest when we are given all our rights as equal citizens of Pakistan.

The Case for Joint Electorate

Peter Jacob

Introduction

The Separate Electorate system was important by General Zia-ul-haq through Presidential Order No. 14 in 1985, which amended Articles 51 and Article 106 of the constitution of Pakistan. These changes were part of the Eighth constitutional amendment to be later approved by the parliament.

By virtue of these amendments citizen of Pakistan were barred from voting for candidates other than their own religious identity in the 1985 and four subsequent elections in 1988, 1993 and finally in 1997. The religious minorities were only allowed to vote for limited seats reserved for their communities 10 amongst the total 217in the National Assembly (Lower House) in the bicameral parliament and minorities were to choose 23 representatives in the four provincial assemblies having total strength of 483 members. It is important to keep the fact in view that this process of religio-political segregation started in 1979, at the time of local bodies' elections.

While this electoral system undermined the polity as a whole and the social fabric in the country, the religious minorities suffered the worst social, political and economic decline and deprivation in this scheme of religio- political apartheid in the past fifteen years.

Main Objection

The system of Separate electorate violates the norms and principles of democratic discourse and standards of Universal Adult Franchise. This law and its practice is breach of the fundamental rights enshrined in he constitution of Pakistan, which guarantees Equality of citizens before the law in Article 25.

Separate Electorate is against the wishes, the dream and promises of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the father of the nation in his inaugural speech to the constituent Assembly of Pakistan on August 11, 1947. He had said that, "you may belong to any religion, cast or creed- that has nothing to do with the business of the state. ---- Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense as citizens of Pakistan."

The system of separate electorate is discriminatory is a violation of international commitments made at the forum of United Nations as a member country.

a) It is a breach of Articles 2, 3,and 4of the Declaration on the Elimination of all Forms of intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion and Belief.

b) It is also a violation of the Articles 4 (1), and 5(1), of declaration on the Rights of persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities.

Effects

1) The effects of Separate Electorate were not limited to the Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religious apartheid leading to gross violations of human rights. Besides creating the new , it strengthened the religious biased that already existed in the law

a) Beyond the scope of reason and logic the constitution of Pakistan in Article 2 declared Islam to be the state religion. As if non- living and abstract entities were capable of professing a faith.

b) The head of the state according to Article 41(2) must be a Muslim.

c) De facto, a non- Muslim cannot be the Prime Minister because the oath of this office according to Article to 91(3), requires the Prime Minister to declare his or her belief in the finality of the prophethood Muhammad (PBUH), Quran and Sunna.

d) Under Article 227and 228 of the constitution, laws that do not confirm to sharia cannot be enforced in Pakistan.

e) Under Article 203-D of the constitution of Pakistan the Federal shariat court which operates as a parallel judicial system has powers to pronounce any law as defunct if they dream it to be repugnant to Islam.

f) Article 203-E (4) of the constitution of Pakistan disqualified non- Muslims lawyers for appearing as a pleader in the Federal Shariat court even if non-Muslim is a party or is affected by the law. The law is not merely discriminatory but illogical in view of the fact that non- Muslim lawyers in Pakistan, receive exactly same qualification for registration as Muslim lawyers.

The constitution of Pakistan by, setting precedence of exclusive treatment to believers of one faith, paves the way for discrimination and systematic infringement of civil, Political, Culture, Economic and Social rights of persons belonging to religious minorities.

This policy characterizes the subsequent formulation of general laws a well. We refer to few examples:

g) The Shariat Act passed in 1999; makes Islamic sharia the superem law of the lands; which means that general and substantive laws would be governed by the faith of the majority community. The non- Muslim citizens are subjected to religious laws that are not part of their belief system. It has happened in case of Hudood laws, qisas and Diyat ordinance, and other Islamic legislation.

h) The Hoodand Zina Ordinance, is part of the criminal law since 1979. Our primary objection to this law is that it fails to distinguish between the crime of rape and adultery and that under this law the testimony of four male Muslims eyewitnesses would be required to prove the offence of adultery (and rape). The law also provides for amputation of human limbs, stoning to death and flogging as punishment for some crimes such as theft and drinking intoxicating liquor.

It is understandable why he commission of inquiry constituted by the government of Pakistan in 1997 in pursuance of the international convention on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, recommended repeal of this law.

i) Qisas and Diyat Ordinanace, also part of the Pakistan penal code since 1990, deals with offences of homicides and provides for paying off blood money in case of loss of life or limbs as compromise. The law has been criticized by eminent jurists and human rights activists in the country.

j) The law of Evidence (Quran-e-Shihadat) since 1984 reduced the value of a court testimony by non-Muslims and women to half as compared to Muslims men, according to interpretations of the law. Where two Muslims males would be required, four non- Muslims citizens will be obligatory to testify any occurrence.

k) The flawed drafting and unscrupulous enforcement of section; 295 B & C, 298 A, B & C, commonly known as blasphemy laws of the Pakistan penal code, have caused loss of many precious lives and victims have been forced to leave their homes. These laws are discriminatory, because they are religion specific and faulty, because they do not define the crime but only the modus operandi and the punishments.

It was due to the failure of successive government; to understand and respond to the appeals made by Dr. John Joseph, a leading Human Rights Activist and Bishop of Faisalabad, that he was forced to offer his self- sacrifice on Monday 6th, 1998 in front of a court at Sahiwal that passed death sentence on an accused for blasphemy.

l) Discriminatory legislative on pretext of separate representation during 80's including into worst forms of organized violence against non- Muslims in the 90's including killings after accusations of blasphemy (Naimat Ahmer, Baba Bantu and Tahir Iqbal in 1992 and Manzoor Masih 1994,) many such accused were forced to leave their homes and country in order to save their lives.

m) Attacks, on localities, land grabbing and destruction of properties belonging to non-Muslims became more common. The worst example was the incidents of burning of 14 Churches and destruction of whole village of Shantinagar was in February 1997.

n) Initiatives aimed at strengthening religious apartheid e.g. inducting a column for religion in the National Identity Cards and more stringent Sharia laws (Sharia Act) 1991 and Shariat Bill of 1998).

2) The apartheid system of electorate deprived religious minorities of their civil and political rights, effectively. THe whole of Pakistan is a constituency for each one of the ten seats reserved for the religious minorities on the political process due to their know liberal outlook but the majority community and (Muslims) was also deprived of a poliical ethos that forms and builds the basis of a democratic and pluralist polity.

3) This apartheid system of electorate deprived religious minorities of their civil and political rights, effectively and completely. The whole of Pakistan is a constituency for each one of the ten seats, reserved for the religious minorities( Hindu 4, Christian 4, Ahmedies 1, Parsis and others 1) for the National Assembly in the house of 217. Similarly the whole province is the constituency for each of the 23 seats in the provincial Assembly in the four provinces. This system was so designed that every minority member of respective Assemblies became political rival of others. Therefore these so-called minority representatives could never unite even on the issues that meant life and death for their communities.

4) Religious minorities in Pakistan were virtually disfranchised. The representatives of minorities that they presumably elected (refer to case J Salik Vs. Election commission of Pakistan, 1997, Supreme Court of Pakistan), did not have any say or weightage in the legislation, thus remained voiceless when discriminatory to religious minorities was pushed through the parliament The system further provided justification, rather than a change of mode of representation. The system further provided Justification for structuring of law and the political system, on religious divide rather than principle of equality of citizenship.

5) It was after the induction of Separate Electorate in the political system that following polices based on religious flourished:

Candidates who learnt Holy Quran by heart (Hafiz-e-Quran) are given 25extra marks for jobs and admission in government institutions. It is no wonder why there is negligible presence of non-Muslims in Judiciary and Superior services of Pakistan in 80's and 90's as compared to 50' and 60's.

According to jail regulations the prisoners who learn to recite Holy Quran by heart, get a rebate of six months in their imprisonment. No such a facility is available to non- Muslim prisoners, except in the province of Sindh, where also it needs proper implementation.

Response from the Religious Minorities

The minorities have voiced their concerns over and again through all constitutional and legal means, including writing and meeting to presidents, Prime Ministers, protest rallies, boycott, litigation and press statements. The minorities recorded their resentment over this injustice several times ever since its promulgation.

1. It is a common knowledge that the Ahmedia community, declared to be non-Muslims under the Constitution of Pakistan, refused to participate in the Separate Electorate and staged a boycott of all elections. The fact that members of provincial Assembly and National Assembly of the Ahmedi community in past five general election belonged to one family and their voting couldd not exceed more than a few thousand, is an evident fact.

2. The Commission for justice & peace, called religious minorities for Participation under protest in the General Election in 1993, the call was responded and this fact was recognized by the Election commentator (Mr Irshad Ahmed Haqani) on Pakistan Television while reading the election results.

3. The opinionated circles, (The Catholic Bishops Conference of Pakistan and Bishops of Church of Pakistan toping the list) voiced their concerns and demanded restoration of Joint Electorate at various forums and wrote to the authorities about this demand.

The heads of the mainstream churches (Catholic Church, Church of Pakistan, United Presbyterians and the Salvation Army) in a joint statement demanded restoration of Joint Electorate on September 1993.

The recent letter was written to Gen. Pervaiz Musharraf on October 22, 2000 by His Grace Armando Trinidade, Archbishop of Lahore and President of Catholic Bishops Conference of Pakistan and Rt. Rev. Samuel Azariah, Bishop of Raiwind and Moderator Church of Pakistan reiterating and demanded for Joint Electorate.

4. Due to growing consciousness among concerned quarters of society and the adverse effects of this system, successive governments made promises to change the system but have failed consistently to live up to their promises. The Pakistan Peoples Party government in February 1996 even promised dual Vote for minorities but failed to take any practical step.

5. Writ petitions challenging contradictions of practice and interpretations of the Constitutions were filed at the time of general elections in 1993. Constitutional petitions (C. Misc. P. No. 587-L / 1993 & C. P. No. 1147-L / 1993) filled by Chaudhry Naeem Shakir regarding separate electorate has been pending in the Supreme Court of Pakistan for past seven years without a hearing.

National and International Authorities

6. The Special Rapporteus on Religious Intolerance and Discrimination based on Religious and Belief, paid a visit to Pakistan in 1995 and recommended the abolition of this Electoral system in his report and changing it by Single Electoral system to comply with international standard of suffrage (Ref. Documents. E/CN. 4/1995/96 Add. 1)

7. The Government of Pakistan while responding to the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur made a false claim that the system of Separate Electorate had been abolished in 1997. We know that this claim of the government (UN document A/52/477/Add. 1) is still not true.

8. The follies of this system have been exposed and criticized by eminent Jurists and civil society organizations. Leading Human Rights organizations such as Human Development, Pakistan Institute for labor Education & Research, Shirkat Gah, Aurat Foundation, have issued several statements demanding replacement of Separate Electorate by Joint Electorate.

9. Justice (Rt.) Sardar Fakhar-e-Alam, the Chief Election Commissioner, on his retirement in November 1997 recommended abolition of separate electorate system.

Initiative for the National Integration

It is important to keep in view that unlike Muslims of the Indian sub-continent of 19th and 20th century, there has been no demand for a territorial and political autonomy by the religious minorities. Their demand has been for equal rights as the majority community and a just social and political order. There is absolutely no justification for maintaining the present electoral system; its rationale has been questioned over and again in Pakistan.

We feel that, to undo the damage caused by divisive policies and laws, a serious and integrated initiative has to be launched where the government has to perform as main actor but religious minorities, their organization and organs of the civil society shall also play a part. This plan should consider three aspects namely:

1. Promotion of non-discrimination at social and political level and equality before the law.

2. Participation of religious minorities in the business of the state to inculcate a culture of tolerance and peace.

3. Cooperation and national integration.

However, the most vital step remains the first step towards non-discrimination. All laws that discriminate between citizens of Pakistan on basis of religion and other identities have to be abolished. Joint Electorate of course is the most suitable starting point.

Long Term & Broad Benefits

This initiative for the National integration shall curtail and defuse the impact of divisive policies, laws and politics. And confidence of the citizens of Pakistan will be restored as they shall become a society free of prejudices of religion, caste and creed, as envisioned in the Constitution of Pakistan 1973.

Immediate and Specific

This initiative is bound to bring some immediate benefits:

At national level, concerns of civil society will be accommodated and anxieties of the religious minorities in Pakistan shall be removed.

An international level Pakistan will gain respect by honoring its commitment as regards to removing the Electoral System and resolving the issue of participation and representation minorities in Pakistan.

Present Situation and Recommendations

Now that , separate Electorate System has been tested for past fifteen years and proven to be detrimental to democratic development in Pakistan. Restoration of joint electorate linked with the required reforms in the system especially concerning to the participation of common people in the political process in order to realize the ideals of civil and political rights is but the only option.

The present government has shown its willingness to hold elections of the District Assemblies under the formula for Devolution of Power beginning from the current year. We reiterate our belief in the common and shared destiny of people of Pakistan. We also reiterate our commitment and faith in empowerment of the common people and demand removing poverty of rights in the political arena.

The present government is empowered under Supreme Court's judgement on May 12, 2000 to make changes in the legal and political system including the constitutional amendments.

The present regime therefore can abolish the separate electorate system, especially keeping in view that it was introduced by a non-elected regime.

Representation of Religious Minorities

The undersigned and the endorsing organizations are not against representation of religious minorities as may be construed by those in favor of religious apartheid. Religious minorities, as a marginalized group on principles of social justice need their representation in the state institutions. As in case of women, labor and tribal areas, we would suggest that their seats be allocated according to the arrangement within the framework of Peoples Representation Act 1976.

It can be done by any of the following legal means:

a) By issuing a Presidential order to this effect (restoring joint electorate) while making new set up under the devolution of power scheme.

b) The government at the time of electoral reforms can change electoral rules to make it at least according to the constitution creating options for minorities' voters to vote for candidate of their own choice, Muslim or non-Muslim.

c) The petition regarding interpretation of the constitution of Pakistan has been pending in the Supreme Court for past seven years. The government can help the case by allowing superior judiciary, to decide independently by not opposing petition filed by Mr. Naeem Shakir. It will be judicious and legal step in light of the fact that separate electorate is a breach of Article 25 of Constitution of Pakistan which guarantees "equality of citizens before the law".

System of Religious Apartheid (Separate Electorates)

Aftab Mughal

Muslim majority in areas of the sub-continent of India comprising North West Frontier Province; Balochistan; Sindh; West Punjab; and East Bengal (renamed as East Pakistan and separated from Pakistan to become an independent state of Bangladesh in December 1971) emerged as a new country to be known as the Dominion of Pakistan on Aug. 14, 1947. The fledgling country was to be a secular state where all citizens were to be equal without any bias to caste, color, creed or religion. The founder of the nation, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, while addressing the first Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on Aug. 11, 1947 directed its members to formulate the Constitution on the following principles: -

"... You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques, or to any other place of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed, which has nothing to do with the business of the state. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we all citizens are equal citizens of one state. Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims will cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of one state."

Over the last fifty years every government, to cover its failure, took recourse to the so-called Islamization of Pakistan in an effort to appease the masses. Such actions gave birth to more and more Islamic Political Parties, with each new one being more extremist than the others did. This has led to the obvious climax of severe religious intolerance and terrorism in the name of Islam in the country today. Pakistan is currently being torn apart by a serious sectarian strife. The target of the religious parties are of course the religious minorities, who are already marginalized through religious apartheid and thus most susceptible to gross misuse of the existing discriminatory laws. The lack of political will, on the part of all successive governments of the recent past, to arrest these destructive trends has further encouraged the extremist forces to continue to persecute and victimize the religious minorities with impunity. As long as such governments lack the moral and ethical courage to take action against such extremists because of political expediency, the situation in the country is most likely to go from bad to worse for the religious minorities.

Religious Apartheid
Late president General Zia-ul-Haq, a military dictator came to power at the behest of an alliance of nine Islamic political parties by ousting the elected government of Mr. Zulifqar Ali Bhutto in 1977, projected himself as the "savior" of Pakistan who had come with the divine mission of making the country into an Islamic state. Throughout his 11 years in power he went out of the way to please the religious parties to perpetuate his rule. He was also responsible for giving birth to the most extremist of Islamic Political Parties and also allowed them to get armed with the most sophisticated weapons and, to a large extent, to let loose a reign of terror in the name of Islam against anyone who opposed Zia. Most of these parties claim that in an Islamic State there is no room for non-Muslims as in Saudi Arabia and have often indulged in acts of terrorism against the religious minorities.

At the behest of these parties, Zia legislated a host of so called Islamic laws, which were opposed by even the progressive Muslims. In 1985, through a Presidential Order (No. 14 of 1985) he amended Articles 51 and 106 of the Constitution and thereby introduced RELIGIOUS APARTHEID into the politics of the country. His amendments divided the whole nation in five religious groups, Muslims; Christians; Hindus; Ahmadis; Parsis and other smaller minority factions. Each group was allocated their own seats in the National and Provincial Assemblies and were made responsible for electing their own candidates through a Separate Electorate System without being allowed to cast their vote for the candidates of the other groups. He thus effectively isolated the religious minorities not only from the majority but also from each other and created friction within as well.

This situation continues to prevail despite the strong opposition to it by the religious minorities as well as by the progressive political parties. It is important to note that the Separate Electorate system violates the human rights of all Pakistanis, regardless of their religion by denying them the basic right to cast their vote for a candidate of their choice. It also violates Articles 2 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as Articles 25 and 26 of the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights. The extremists are taking full advantage of this marginalization of the religious minorities to misuse the other discriminatory laws, especially the Blasphemy Laws, against them unabated. So we strongly demanded to the government to restore joint electorate system.

Recommendation
Since Pakistan is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we therefore, urge to the Government of Pakistan to immediately consider the following step to protect and promote the legitimate rights of its religious minorities in particular and all its citizens in general: The immediate restoration of the Joint Electorate System.

Joint OR Separate Electorate

Muhammad Waseem

The issue of separate electorate for religious minorities in Pakistan is hardly a matter about minorities. It is indeed all about mainstream politics that is firmly couched in Muslim majority. Of course, there are historical reasons for various mainstream politicians to believe that separate electorate was somehow inextricably related to the Pakistan movement and the Two-Nation Theory. For ulema, there are Islamic reasons to support separate electorate inasmuch as politics is required to distinctly based on an understanding between communities of faith.

Even more significantly, there are political reasons - or more precisely electoral reasons in a democratic framework - which push various contenders for power in their bid to win a majority in the national or provincial assemblies to render the minority community ineffective and irrelevant.

How does it happen? The obvious starting point is that there is no love lost between the religious minorities and Islamic elements. The minority communities of Pakistan, including Hindus, Christians, Parsees, Buddhists, Sikhs and Ahmadis, are by definition not the constituency of Islamic parities. The more the latter stress on their Islamic agenda and seek to define the national destiny of Pakistan in terms of an exclusive Islamic identity with a corresponding Islamic policy profile, the more the minorities shy away from them. It is a net loss of votes for Islamic parties. Their perceived anti-minority culture pushes Hindus, Christians and others to look for security and assurance elsewhere. The loss of Islamists becomes the gain of liberals and leftists. The former need to stop the shift of minority votes to the latter. One way is to eliminate the joint electorate and instead bring in separate electorate.

On the other hand, the Muslim League and other parties from the center and center-right have been changing their stance on separate electorate, sometimes opposing it and sometimes supporting it, depending on the game of numbers on the floor of assemblies. The Muslim League in the early 1950s typically, though not wholly, supported separate electorate, but in the late 1950s and 1960s it upheld the cause of joint electorate. Finally, the liberal-leftist parties and ethno-regional parties - ranging from the Awami League, PPP and NAP to minuscule parties operating on the contemporary political stage of Pakistan - attracted the vote of religious minorities in the latter's search for security against the much-feared Islamic parties.

But realpolitik is not acknowledged to be of any importance to their position on the issue, claim the Islamists. Their stance is, instead, based on ideological considerations. They argue in favor of preservation of the foundations of the state of Pakistan. For example, Jammat-i-Islami has most consistently argued over a half century in favor of separate electorate in order to operationalize the link between state and religion. From Maulana Maudoodi in the 1950s to Prof. Khurshid Ahmed at the start of the new millennium, the Jamaat has adhered to a firm position on this issue. It has regarded joint electorate as a negation of the Two-Nation Theory and a violation of the principles of Islam.

In his recent articles in Dawn, Prof. Khurshid Ahmed has reiterates some of the oft-quoted arguments on the question of electorate usually projected from the Jamaat-i-Islami platform. These arguments are based on a view of history which is characterized by a grossly subjective reading of men and matters, often divorced from reality.

Following are some of the interesting points made in these articles: Under a social contract two independent states came into being in the subcontinent in 1947. Islamic identity, democracy and federalism are symbols of the nation's consensus. Pakistan is a state of nationalities rather than a nation. Ottoman caliphate was based on pluralism. The system of election is not about the right of citizens but about the right of a nation or a group to choose its representatives. In 1985, the National Assembly and Senate (while still functioning under martial law and struggling to pass the indemnity bill as 8th amendment for getting rid of military rule at any price) revived the separate electorate as demanded by Zia. The problem of minorities has increased all over the world and liberal democracy has failed to solve it. These assertions subordinate logic to ideological commitment and put history upside down. The uniformed nature of these observations is mind-boggling.

How do minorities look at separate electorate? The Hindu-led minority communities had opposed the second Basic Principles committee report in the early 1950s because of its provision for separate electorate. The matter came to a head in 1952 when the federal government amended the electoral law under the 1935 Act as amended in 1947 to make a provision for separate electorate for the scheduled castes, ostensibly to divide the Hindu voters. The East Bengal minority conference at Comilla in 1952 condemned the system as inherently divisive and opposed to national integration. The minority leadership in East Pakistan supported joint electorate with reservation of seats for under-represented minorities such s the scheduled castes and Christians. The 1973 Constitution finally accommodated some of these ideas.

But whose right is it anyway to go for separate electorate, - the minority community seeking security or the majority community imposing its will on the former? When A. K. Brohi piloted the Constitution Bill in 1956, he declared that if minorities wanted joint electorate, it must be given. But to no avail. Already, people in East Pakistan had comprehensively voted the Muslim League out of power in the 1954 elections, along with the party line of separate electorate. Finally, the responsibility for legislating on that issue shifted to provincial assemblies as per the 1956 constitution. After that, the bill for joint electorate was passed by the East Pakistan Assembly.

By 1957, after five years of bitter controversy, joint electorate became the basis of the election system in the whole of Pakistan. The majority of legislators finally thought that separate electorate was meant to safeguard the interests of a minority, not a majority community, as in British India. After all, non-Muslim members of legislatures voted just like their Muslim counterparts for election of president (and later Senate) as well as for legislation. Assembly votes, Muslim or non-Muslim, meant numbers on the floor.

The 1962 constitution maintained the system of joint electorate. Following that, general elections were held in 1962 on the basis of joint electorate, finally deviating from the colonial heritage of separate electorate. Subsequently, the 1965, 1970 and 1977 elections were also held on the basis of joint electorate. While the 1956 constitution was unequivocal on the issue, the 1962 and 1973 constitutions clearly provided for joint electorate. In other words, none of the three constitutions provided for separate electorate.

Under Zia, Islamic parties mounted a campaign against separate electorate once again. The military junta believed that in any election held under the 1973 Constitution, religious minorities would vote for the PPP. The way out was separate electorate which would ensure that non-Muslim votes do not go in favor of that party. The 8th amendment enshrined the provision for separate electorate. The subsequent elections were held on that basis.

Election observes from within and outside and the world opinion in general severely criticized the system. It was alleged that procedurally the election of minority candidates had become a farce because in many cases their constituencies spread out to the whole country or a whole province or otherwise extended over extremely large areas that they cannot be handed easily by single candidates. The system was considered akin to religious apartheid based on discrimination. Human rights organizations condemned it as virtual disenfranchisement of minorities. But, argues the Islamist lobby, minorities do get more seats in the assemblies under this system than they otherwise would. For the minorities, the issue is larger than formal representation in the parliament at the macro-level. This system, with its strong bias in favor of religious differentiation weakens the polity and national unity and sharpens inter-communal disaffection at the micro-level - in that social, cultural and residential contexts. It provides legitimacy to discriminatory practices in matters of education, employment and social interaction. Minorities are denied access to representation and participation at the local and higher levels because, unlike Muslim voters, they do not have their territorial representatives in legislatures.

Some Christian leaders supported separate electorate in the past, especially Joshua Fazal Din. The idea was to placate the majority community and hope for some generosity on its part. The past decade took away that dream from the minority section of the Christian intelligentsia because of the perceived irrelevance and powerlessness of minority legislators, in addition to brutalization of inter-communal relations. The Ahmedi community boycotted these elections any way. The system has failed to deliver politically and morally by denying equal constitutional rights and civic liberties to religious minorities with the Muslims.

Curtsy: The Dawn

Joint Electorates for National Integrity

Fr. Aftab James Paul

Chief Executive General Pervez Musharraf, while announcing the devolution of power plan, said that the Government had decided to retain the separate electorate system for the minorities. He said that it was in their interest to have this system; for otherwise, no minority man or woman could get elected.

The religious minorities and many enlightened civil society members of the country were expecting the restoration of joint electorates. Alas! The Chief Executive did not do that. He disappointed all those who have been struggling for the establishment of a better society, where all the citizens can live equally. Because these people consider the system of separate electorate as tantamount to the socio-political murder of religious minorities of Pakistan. Religious minorities have expressed their deep concern and reaction to it.

Of course, there is a tiny group among the religious minorities which favors the system of separate electorates. It is because it can achieve its vested interests through this system only. The Muslim religious clergy is also in favor of the separate electorates. Their patron, General Zia, had introduced this system at their behest. The system of separate electorates has grave implications. It is relevant not only to the minorities but also to the social, political, culture of country. It has very badly effected the life of the members of religious minorities and has played a crucial role in making them second-grade citizens.

In order to have a deeper understanding of the influence of the separate electorate system on religious minorities, an analysis of the said system is very important. After the sad demise of the father of the nation, Quaid-e-Azam, a huge debate started, in the shape of the Objectives Resolution. The fundamentalist forces prevailed and had the Objectives Resolution approved. The Constitution approved in 1956, adopted the system of joint electorates. In the Constitution framed by Ayub Khan in 1962 the system of joint electorate was left in tact. General Yahya Khan under a legal framework held elections under the system of joint electorates. In 1973 when the public representatives, framed a new constitution, they unanimously agreed to the system of joint electorates.

In 1977, when General Zia-ul-Haq came into power, he adopted Islam as his slogan, and in order to prolong his tenure in power he used different tactics. One of his many tactics was to please the religious clergy. And in order to get favors of this group he introduced the system of separate electorates for the religious minorities.

Zia introduced the system of separate electorate for a few reasons:

(a) He knew that Pakistan came into being in the name of Islam. Therefore he could do anything in the country using rather abusing the name of religion. By introducing the system of separate electorates it was easy for him to please the fundamentalist Muslim religious clergy who gathered around him in the name of Islam.

(b) Divide and rule is an old policy which Zia used in a very cunning manner. He not only divided the minority and majority groups by this system, but also divided the religious minorities into different compartments. He also created linguistic and provincial prejudices and spread segregation.

(c) Since Zia came into power by ousting the PPP government, is goal was to weaken the PPP and lessen its vote bank. Zia knew very well that religious minorities had always voted for the PPP, and in this manner he deprived it of its large vote bank.

Now General Musharraf has announced that he would continue the same system for religious minorities. It is, therefore, important to highlight the alienation, segregation and socio-political difficulties this system has created for them. And how this system is working against their aspirations.

It is pertinent to know that religious minorities have never demanded the system of separate electorates. In united India, before the creation of Pakistan, Muslims demanded separate electorates, because they wanted a separate homeland. While the minorities of the country want to strengthen Pakistan as they have been doing in the past. They do not want to be separated, rather they want to get more united.

Since religious minorities have not demanded the system-rather it has been imposed on them-they feel that its continuation is an effort to make them second-class citizens. One thing is clear that living in a state, either one is its citizen or not. Can it be said that they system of separate electorates is a conspiracy hatched against the religious minorities to declare that they are not the citizens of Pakistan?

General Musharraf said that the purpose of the introduction of separate electorate was to ensure the representation of religious minorities. But from 1985 to date this system has not been helpful for the said purpose. The representatives of the religious minorities have failed in representing the minorities; on the other hand the secular political parties, journalists, intellectuals, human rights activists, social workers and foreign countries have raised their voice in favor of minorities. Representatives of religious minorities have proved to be puppets, echoes of their master's voice. They are the brokers who after winning elections indulge in the business of selling their communities into the hand of those who want to come into power.

For a minority candidate the whole of the country or the province is the constituency. Going back to the history of this so-called representation, it can be said that from 1985 to 1997, Sindh, NWFP and Balochistan had no Christian representatives in National Assembly. Each time the MNAs for the Christians were from the Punjab. If we go into more details we can say that some MNAs belong to Sargodha, Lahore and Gujranwala while the other MNAs were from one district, Faisalabad. They were from the same locality and they were also neighbors.

Do the people of the other provinces have no right of their representation in the national Assembly? Since the largest vote bank of the Christian is in the Punjab, all the four Christian MNAs are elected from this province.

In a democratic set-up regular contact of the representative with his/her voters is very important and man/woman responsible for the whole of the country and the province cannot do it. It is political injustice. On the other hand for the people also it is difficult to contact and meet their representatives. How can a poor Christian living in Karachi afford to meet his/her representative in Faisalabad? If members of the religious minorities go to an MNA or MPA of the majority community they are told plainly to go to their own representative. This has created a sense of deprivation among the religious minorities.

The International Charter of Human Rights ways that all the citizens are equal. Pakistan is a signatory to it. How can it then adopt a system that signifies inequality and discrimination? In fact, the Constitution of Pakistan in article 25 states that all citizens are equal before the law. To have a system which promotes inequality is thus incomprehensible.

At present nowhere in the world such a system prevails. There is no justification for such an unjust system in Pakistan.

The system of separate electorates has created alienation not only among the majority and minority groups but also within the minorities themselves. The religious minorities are divided into different compartments. Unity among families is vanishing.

Pakistan is a poor county. We, as a nation, are crucified on the cross of foreign debts of $34 billion. The price hike is rocketing to the skies. In such a difficult situation to hold elections for religious minorities on a separated day, to print separate ballot papers and make all other expenditures are a big burden on the economy of the country. The amount of money spent on holding separate elections for religious minorities can be utilized to open schools, hospitals and for the betterment of citizens. The system of separate electorates is against the desires of the Father of the Nation. He was the champion of equality but this system is against the aspirations of them man who struggled for Pakistan's creation.

The system of separate electorates has nothing to do with the spirit of Islam, which teaches love, unity, brotherhood, justice and equality and opposes hatred, prejudice, and discrimination. The system of separate electorates propagates values which are inhuman. The Muslim clergy has an important duty to raise its voice against a system, which propagates discrimination and prejudice.

The system not only deprives minorities of their fundamental rights, but also deprives the majority community of its rights. A Muslim candidate in any constituency has a right to get votes of all citizens of the area. He/she is deprived of the votes of the minorities, although they may be his/her strong supporters.

Each government acknowledges with appreciation the services of the religious minorities at the national level, in the fields of education, health and social work. Each year members of the minorities receive Pride of Performance and other presidential awards. It is difficult to understand why they should be alienated through separate electorates.

We are living in an age of interfaith harmony and dialogue. EU has one currency, one visa. We, as a nation, are moving away from one another. Instead of building bridges, we are constructing walls, using separate electorates to act as cement. Sectarianism has already played a divisive role. Can we afford more divisions?

The system of the separate electorate is harmful not only for the religious minorities but it also has a negative effect on the national integrity. It has created a feeling of segregation in the country and has not proved to be a proper mean of the representation of religious minorities.

Enlightened leaders of religious minorities are planning to launch a strong movement against this system declaring it meaningless and a burden on the economy of the country. Already 200,000 signatures in favor of joint electorate have been presented to the CE. It is interesting to know that the Muslims have fully participated in this campaign. Seminars and consultations have been organized.

Surveys are being conducted and most of the people are in favor of joint electorate. Government should rethink about its decision regarding separate electorates. Keeping in view all the evils it has created, it should restore the system of Joint Electorate. They system of Joint Electorate will guarantee national unity, harmony, equality and prosperity.

Curtsy: The Nation

Towards Joint Electorate in Pakistan

Jennifer Jag Jivan

Optimistic feelings arose among enlightened citizens, particularly the religious minorities, when on 12th October 1999 General Pervez Musharraf too over the country with his seven point agenda. It was felt that the current regime would take certain fundamental steps that would turn Pakistan into a truly democratic state, helping reduce religious intolerance and bigotry in the country if not completely eliminate such negative sentiments. However, since then many a hopes have been dashed such as the backtracking of the government when it reversed its decision t make a minor change in the procedural law in registering blasphemy cases in May this year.

Moreover, on 23rd March 2000 when the General announced his program on the devolution of power at the local and governmental level, the complete unfolding of which was to be announced on the 14th of August the independence day of Pakistan, he kept silent on the form of election for religious minorities - whether it would be joint or separate. This uncertain attitude of the government was most frustrating. The announcement on the 14th of August by the General who is of the view that minorities are better represented in parliament by the separate form of election rather than in joint electorate is yet another blow to religious minorities and civil society.

The separate form of election was introduced by General Zia-ul-Haq in 1979 for the local bodies and in 1985 for the provincial and national assemblies through the Presidential Order No 14 (1985) by amending Articles 51 and 106 of the Constitution of Pakistan in what is called the Eighth Constitutional amendment and as approved by the parliament. By doing so Zia-ul-Haq made ineffective democratic forces and turned non-Muslims into lesser citizens. Under these elections religious minorities are forced to vote for a person of their own religion who may be unknown to them and live miles and miles away instead of voting for the candidate of their own constituency. This form of election makes it almost impossible for non-Muslim citizens to take part in matters pertaining to the state. It not only usurps the fundamental rights of religious minorities but becomes an issue of usurping the rights of one hundred and thirty five million people of Pakistan as a non-Muslim can neither vote nor get a vote from a Muslim because s/he does not belong to the same religion and the same happens in the case of Muslim citizens. This violates the fundamental rights of Muslim and non-Muslim citizens as it deprives them of the right of free franchise.

It was with these concerns that in June 2000 certain Christian organizations working for minority concerns as well as the wider community came together in Lahore to deliberate on certain issues affecting religious minorities on account of the policies of the government of General Pervez Mushrraf. They formed a coalition - Christian Organizations for Social Action in Pakistan (COSAP) and decided to struggle for a fair and just society in Pakistan. For the time being they are firmly decided upon to concentrate and forgive their utmost to the restoration of joint electorate in Pakistan.

All those who believe in democracy and human rights with sincerity are of the view that separate electorate distorts the principle of representation as the whole country is turned into a single constituency for non-Muslims. This system compartmentalizes the whole country into five religious segments: Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Ahmadis, and Parsis, Sikhs and other non-Muslims. Thus on religious basis division and discrimination is created among citizens. Such a system is not only an undemocratic form of election but adds to the further division and weakening of the nation. Time is a witness to the fact that due to separate electorate a gap between the majority and minority communities has taken place, where acceptance and tolerance has been reduced, and where an increase in violence against religious minorities is on the rise.

COSAP and other like minded organizations and individuals working for joint electorate have always propounded that separate electorate was adopted without the consultation and will of the religious minorities which cuts them off from the political main stream. This system not only contradicts the Charter of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but also is fundamentally against the basic right of the Constitution of Pakistan. International organizations like Amnesty International, Asia Watch and the UN Commission for Human Rights have also opposed such elections. Restoration of joint electorate has been demanded in the light of the 1973 Constitution - where all citizens are given an equal right of vote without discrimination of caste or creed. Such a form of election is also in accordance with the wishes of the Quid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. I quote in part his speech of 11th August 1947 to the first Constituent Assembly; You are free; are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed - that has nothing to do with the business of the State… We are all citizens and equal citizens of one State.

Moreover, prior to the 1973 Constitution, it was the joint electorate that was introduced in the country as seen in the Constitutions of 1956, of 1962 of Ayub, and later by the Legal framework Order of President Yahya Khan. Here, it is important to note that these Constitutions had also the approval of those groups and jamaats who had participated in the 1970 and 1977 elections on the basis of joint electorate and who had signed the 1973 Constitution without objecting to the joint electoral system - even though they oppose it today! It is truly ironical that those groups opposing the joint electorate tell the religious minorities that separate electorate is in their favor! It is for their good! Yet, certain national political parties like Tehrik-e-Insaf, Millat Party, Pakistan People's Party, Awami Jahmoori Party, Tehrik-e-Istiqlal and others are in favor of joint elections. Even the election commission of Pakistan in two of its reports recommended joint elections. Even in 1995 when the special rapporteur on religious Intolerance and Discrimination based on Religion and Belief visited Pakistan his report recommended the abolition of the separate electorate into the single electoral system in order to comply with international suffrage standards. Again in November 1997 when Justice (Retd.) Sardar Fakhar-e-Alam, the Chief Election Commissioner was retiring the too recommended the abolition of separate electorate as it was a cause of resentment among religio-political parties. The government of Pakistan itself in a session of the Human Rights Commission of UNO in 1998 affirmed that from now onwards elections in Pakistan would be held on the basis of joint electorate.

Here I would like to draw out certain points from COSAP's working paper on "Representation of Religious Minorities in the Elected Bodies; A Case for Joint Electorate" dated 12th June 2000. While stating the effects of the separate electorate system the working paper says that the electoral system has undermined the polity and social fabric of the country where religious minorities have 'suffered the worst social, political and economic decline and deprivation in this scheme of religio-political apartheid in the past fifteen years' which has led 'to gross violations of human rights'. The working paper goes on to give numerous points on the effects of separate electorate only some of which I write for your reflection:

a. Beyond the scope of reason and logic the Constitution of Pakistan in Article 2 declared Islam to be the State religion.

b. The head of the State according to Article 41(2) must be a Muslim.

c. De facto, a non-Muslim cannot be the Prime Minister because the oath of this office according to Article 91(3), requires the Prime Minister to declare his or her belief in the finality of the prophethood of Prophet of Islam (PBUH), Qur'an and Sunnah.

d. Under Articles 227 and 228 of the Constitution, laws that do not confirm to Sharia cannot be enforced in Pakistan.

e. Under Article 203-D of the Constitution of Pakistan the Federal Shariat Court which operates as a parallel judicial system has powers to pronounce any law as defunct if they deem it to be repugnant to Islam.

The Constitution of Pakistan, by setting precedence of exclusive treatment to believers of one faith, paves the way for discrimination and systematic infringement of Civil, Cultural, Economic, Political and Social rights of persons belonging to religious minorities.

As the working paper states such a policy has resulted in the formulation of certain general laws. I write down only two for reference:

f. The Shariat Act passed in 1991; makes Islamic Sharia the supreme law of the land; which means that general and substantive laws would be governed by the faith of the majority community. The non-Muslim citizens are subjected to religious laws that are not part of their belief system. And, that is what is happening in the case of Hudood laws, Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, Law of Evidence and other Islamic legislation.

g. The inadequate drafting and unscrupulous enforcement of section 295 B & C, 298, A, B & C, commonly known as blasphemy laws of the Pakistan Penal Code, have caused loss of many precious lives and victims have been forced to leave their homes. These laws are discriminatory because they are religion specific and faulty, because they do not define the crime but only the modus operandi and the punishments.

Despite the voices raised by the minorities and other civil society groups against separate electorate ever since its promulgation through seminars, published material, press statements, signature campaigns, protest rallies, boycott, litigation, meetings with Presidents, Prime Ministers, Generals and other government officials, it was a shock and great disappointment to religious minorities who felt highly let down with the 14th August announcement which failed to restore joint elections. COSAP and other prominent human rights activists and members of the civil society, which included the director of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, voiced their disappointment, disgust and dissatisfaction of this issue in a press release on 15th August in Lahore. Here is in full the press release as issued:

Press Release

The civil society organizations in this press conference organized by the National Commission for Justice & Peace express their utter disappointment with the devolution plan presented by the Chief Executive on 14th august 2000 (yesterday).

We totally reject this devolution plan for being technically flawed, ill conceived and against the interest of the people of Pakistan as it seeks to alienate political parties in the country and reinforce the division of citizens on the basis of religion.

The plan is not only a counterfeit of the BD system of 60s but also manifests a complete disregard for the wishes of the civil society, conveyed to the National Reconstruction Bureau and relevant authorities, during the past four months. The recommendation regarding Joint Electorate, 50% seats for women, maintaining provincial autonomy, party based elections and demand for general elections have proven to have fallen on deaf ears.

The present regime has ignored the fact that demand for restoration of joint electorate was supported by 19 political parties after thorough deliberations at the All Parties Convention on July 30th, 2000 at Lahore.

Hundreds of voluntary organizations from all over the country voiced this demand in the People Assemblies and 200,000 citizens (Muslims and non-Muslims) expressed their demand through signing a petition to the Chief Executive for restoration of Joint Electorate. These signatures were submitted in the CE's office on August 2nd, 2000.

We are also perturbed at the mockery of Quaid-e-Azam's speech on August 11, 1947 by the Chief Executive. He picked a portion only to use it for his projection. We challenge him to read the full speech in public and analyze his devolution plan in light of views of the founder of the country.

The civil society organizations including six Christian Organizations for Social Action in Pakistan (COSAP), namely Christian Study Center Rawalpindi, Human Development Center Toba Tek Singh, Idara-e-Amn-o-Insaf - Karachi, Justice & Peace Commission - Multan, National Christian Action Forum - Lahore and National Commission for Justice and Peace Lahore, are of the view that there is no option left with the organs of civil society other than launching a Mass Contact Campaign. We are determined to keep this campaign non-violent and peaceful but we are also prepared to make sacrifices to save this country from further devastation by religious apartheid, sectarianism and intolerance.

We appreciate and admire Mr. Derrick Cyprian, the ex-Federal Minister for Minorities, who offered his resignation in the interest of the country after this announcement and we condemn Col. (Rtd.) S. K. Tresslar for taking this portfolio.

The struggle continues for the joint electorate system in Pakistan. For how can it not for all who believe in democratic structures and norms, in equality and equity, in freedom and honor - of all people. Such have no other option but to strive for what is simply right. After all the separated mode of elections is nothing but a political genocide of people whose religious beliefs happen to differ from the majority community!

back to this site's main page about minority representation in Pakistan

Suffrage Universel, un site indépendant consacré à la participation politique des minorités ethnonationales et religieuses
accueil - droit de vote des étrangers- partis ethniques - sièges réservés, quotas
Allemagne - Belgique - Danemark - Etats-Unis - France - Pays-Bas - Royaume-Uni